Commish needs advice (1 Viewer)

[Beetle]

I've been the Commish of a league for 6 years. Our roster requirements have been the same every year and I was thinking of changing things up a bit to allow for a little more strategy and to let the owners take more "ownership" in their starting rosters. Here's what we've started in the past: QB, RB, RB, WR, WR, WR, TE, K, D/STThis year I was thinking of going with this: QB, RB, WR, WR, WR, TE, RB/WR/TE (flex position), K, D/ST. I want to keep the TE requirement, but have some flexibility to complete our starting rosters. I also want to keep the roster to 9 players.A couple of owners have said that we shouldn't change things - "don't fix what's not broken", but I haven't heard from anyone else.What do you guys think?

 

[Ozymandias]

If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

 

[P Boy]

I think it's a great idea that will add more strategy to your league. It will also increase the value of the WR & TE position while taking some value off the RB position - something that a lot of leagues seem to need. I would agree with your idea of changing the rigid roster requirements.That said, any rule change should be installed by a vote of the owners, and if it is agreed upon by the owners that a change like this should be implemented one year after being voted in to allow owners to alter roster strategy during the currnt season to prepare for the following season - unless of course it is a redraft league.

 

[CharlesRoyKevin]

We are doing the same thing. We do not have the TE position but otherwise have the same requirements as your league. We had a vote by all league members at the end of last year. The flex position offers you some flexibily for injury problems and gives you more options to deal with bye weeks. These were the reasons the teams in my league liked the idea. Changing up the rules from time to time is good for a league I think.

 

[Godsbrother]

I would definitely propose it and let the league vote on it. Three years ago we permitted our flex to be ANY position (QB, RB, WR, TE, K, even DEF) and the flexibility was a big hit with the owners.The one thing it did was make QBs as valuable as RBs. QBs tend to fly off the board early and after the draft there are only a three or four starting QBs not selected.

 

[Zasada]

I think having a flex position actually reduces the amount of skill and strategy needed. It allows players to compensate for earlier mistakes...

 

[CharlesRoyKevin]

I think having a flex position actually reduces the amount of skill and strategy needed. It allows players to compensate for earlier mistakes...

Your right, but sometimes teams get crushed by injuries and its nice to be able to have more options. For example we had a team last year who had drafted Ricky and S.Davis for starters(drafted early last year). With a large amount of roster spots, there was no one available. His RB position was absolutely atrocious. Granted those were his mistakes(at least w/Davis) but he had a lot of bad luck at the RB position(W.Green, O.Smith, D.Foster). It kind of ruined his year and he didn't have fun.

 

[dmack4242]

I just love when people say drafting in a league with flex takes less skill. How exactly does one come to that conclusion? Apparently the amount of starting running backs a league is required to start is in direct proportion to the amount of skill and strategy needed for that league. Drafting a team in any type of league requires skill and strategy. Strategy will change from league to league depending on roster requirements, scoring, amount of teams, etc. How does adding flex mean less strategy on draft day? I would think the same, if not more, skill and strategy would need to be employed as you have more options for your starting 9. I have played in both types of leagues. Right now I commish a 15team redraft that uses a starting lineup of 1qb, 1rb, 1wr, 1te, and 3flex (not qb). This gives owners complete control of their lineup. I do not think this setup takes less skills, but definitely a different mindset is needed then your traditional 2rb league. I don't think either setup is better than the other, just different. Comes down to what everyone thinks is more fun.

 

[Tackling Dummies]

I would definitely propose it and let the league vote on it.

Solid advice.

 

[jwvdcw]

Why does this topic have 30000+ views?

 

[Dreamer]

If it ain't broken, don't fix it.

 

[Lowen1]

Well, our league starts QB, RB, WR, WR, K, D and 3 Flex, where flex can be RB/WR/TE. We've had some teams start 4 RB, and others start 3 TE. Some teams didn't draft a TE at all since it wasn't mandatory. One team drafted 3 and regularly started Gates & Shockey. Others went with the 5 WR strategy. It was kind of cool - each team drafted a team that they thought would be the strongest based on our scoring system - and many people had different thoughts on how to create the best team. We think that having 3 Flex players gives each team flexibility when drafting and making starting lineups. I recomend multiple flex. Whatever you do, make sure the entire league is ok with it. The other thing that I think would add something different is IDP, but I can't convince my leaguemates to try this.

 

[Brewtown]

If its a redraft, I see no problem. Bring it up and let a vote take place. If a dynasty league, I have a problem with the rules changing after the fact. My guess is that someone wants to make this move because they are having RB problems. Beetle, what does your roster look like? Just curious.